The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The impacts of companion AI on human relationships: risks, benefits, and design considerations
Open accessAbstract
AI applications intended for companionship have increased in both availability and capabilities in recent years, alongside a spike in loneliness (Johnson 2023 ; Murthy 2023 ). According to a 2024 analysis by venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, companion AI makes up 16 of the top 100 AI apps based on web traffic and monthly active users (Moore 2024 ). Moreover, today’s AI applications have a greater command of human language, an increasing capacity for storing memories, and more varied modalities to support an increasing diversity of experiences, a known driver in the development and deepening of emotional relationships (Skjuve et al. 2022 ).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A substantial body of work examines attachment dysfunction, social withdrawal, unrealistic relational expectations, and the potential for manipulation in human-AI relationships (Turkle, 2011; Malfacini, 2025; Zhou & Zhang, 2025).”
From Intimate Strangers by Design: A Uses and Gratifications Analysis of AI Companionship (2026) · cites this paper as Malfacini, 2025
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A substantial body of scholarship has identified this asymmetry as a mechanism through which AI companions may foster unrealistic relational expectations, displace effortful human intimacy, and normalize one-sided emotional dynamics (Turkle, 2011; Malfacini, 2025; Yankouskaya et al., 2025).”
From Intimate Strangers by Design: A Uses and Gratifications Analysis of AI Companionship (2026) · cites this paper as Malfacini, 2025
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“since AI companions are endlessly patient, attentive, and always available, this may lead users to expect (unrealistically) the same in humans (Malfacini, 2025).”
From Are Attributions of Consciousness to AI Chatbots Epistemically Innocent? (2026) · cites this paper as Malfacini, 2025
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This misalignment matters because youth may interpret simulated empathy and relational cues as genuine, which can increase emotional dependence and blur boundaries between real and artificial relationships [72, 86, 148].”
From Understanding Teen Overreliance on AI Companion Chatbots Through Self-Reported Reddit Narratives (2026) · cites this paper as [86]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.117.3.497 · Cited by 23,245 · cited 1×
“…research has further confirmed that humans are inclined to create social attachments—and accordingly inclined to resist their dissolution—and that both social belonging and the lack thereof have significant impacts on health and well-being (Baumeister and Leary 1995; Holt-Lunstad et al. 2010).”
Positive psychology: An introduction.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.55.1.5 · Cited by 11,351 · cited 1×
“More recently, Martin Seligman’s positive psychology transformed the field from a primary focus on the identification and treatment of psychological disorders to a focus on identifying and building positive human behaviours and mentalities (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000).”
Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review
Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., & Layton, J. B. (2010) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316 · Cited by 7,272 · cited 1×
“…research has further confirmed that humans are inclined to create social attachments—and accordingly inclined to resist their dissolution—and that both social belonging and the lack thereof have significant impacts on health and well-being (Baumeister and Leary 1995; Holt-Lunstad et al. 2010).”
Loneliness and Social Isolation as Risk Factors for Mortality: A Meta-Analytic Review
Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., Baker, M., Harris, T., & Stephenson, D. (2015) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691614568352 · Cited by 6,043 · cited 1×
“The negative health consequences of social isolation, including increased mortality risk, underscore the importance of human relationships (Holt-Lunstad et al. 2015).”
Parfit, D. (1986) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/019824908x.001.0001 · Cited by 5,803
Alone together: why we expect more from technology and less from each other
Fernández Pedemonte, D. (2011) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.48-7239 · Cited by 4,608 · cited 5×
“Psycholo-gist Sherry Turkle cautions “when one becomes accustomed to ‘companionship’ without demands, life with people may seem overwhelming” (2011, 66).”
InfluentialBasic psychological need theory: Advancements, critical themes, and future directions
Vansteenkiste, M., Ryan, R. M., & Soenens, B. (2020) · Motivation and Emotion · doi:10.1007/s11031-019-09818-1 · Cited by 1,891 · cited 1×
“This framework has been extensively validated through empirical research (Vansteenkiste et al. 2020).”
Buçinca, Z., Malaya, M. B., & Gajos, K. Z. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2102.09692 · Cited by 1,124 · cited 1×
“In other contexts, over-reliance refers to relying on an AI system when one should not, such as when the AI errs (Buçinca et al. 2021).”
Culture and the evolution of human cooperation
Boyd, R. T., & Richerson, P. J. (2009) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0134 · Cited by 1,028 · cited 1×
“Anthropologists have further identified social collaboration and cohesion as pivotal factors in human survival and evolution (Boyd and Richerson 2009).”
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Braverman H (1998) Labor and monopoly capital: the degradation of work in the Twentieth Century. NYU Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qfrkf
- Finnis, J (1980) Natural Law and Natural Rights. First. Oxford University Press. https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Law-Rights-Clarendon/dp/0198761104
- Gardner W L, Pickett CL, Knowles M (2005) ‘Social snacking and shielding: using social symbols, selves, and surrogates in the service of belonging needs’. In The Social Outcast: Ostracism, Social Exclusion, Rejection, and Bullying, 227–41. Sydney Symposium of Social Psychology Series. New York, NY, US: Psychology Press.
- Mehan JE (2022) ‘Chapter 5: AI and Our Society: Will the Result Be Professional, Ethical, and Social Deskilling, or Upskilling?’ In Artificial Intelligence - Ethical, Social, and Security Impacts for the Present and the Future. IT Governance Publishing. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/artificial-intelligence/9781787783720/
- OECD (2019) Educating 21st Century Children: Emotional Well-Being in the Digital Age. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/educating-21st-century-children_b7f33425-en
- Ruane E, Birhane A, Ventresque A (2019) Conversational AI: Social and Ethical Considerations. AICS 2019: 104–115. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2563/aics_12.pdf
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–108 of 108
Chen, Y., Yue, D. I. N. G., Wang, L., & Kou, Y. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2738514
Tóth, A. (2026) · Iustum Aequum Salutare · doi:10.69695/ias.2026.3.05
Burston, M. A. (2026) · Young people and learning processes in school and everyday life · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-32479-5_9
Gugushvili, N., Brandtzæg, P. B., & Skjuve, M. B. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2744846
de Ruiter, A. (2026) · Philosophy & Technology · doi:10.1007/s13347-026-01223-0
“The focus on AI companions allows for studying this type of encounters as this technology is designed to offer a feeling of social presence over time through a continuous relationship (Malfacini, 2025).”
Synthetic Intimacy: Relational AI and the Interface of the Self
Shin, D. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-39278-7_6
Serving the Player or Shaping Them? Game-Embedded AI Companions and the Rewiring of Well-being
Vafafar, M., Joel-Edgar, S., Dabbagh, H., & Harteveld, C. (2026) · Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play · doi:10.1145/3800965.3834657
Untitled work
Eom, D., Renner, J., & Chinn, S. (2026) · arXiv (preprint)
Metadata
- Authors
- Malfacini, K.
- Affiliations
- OpenAI (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Malfacini, Kim
- Venue
- AI & SOCIETY
- Published
- 2025-04-16
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 5527-5540
- ISSN
- 0951-5666 (ISSN-L)
- 1435-5655
- OpenAlex
- W4409502783
- Cited by
- 105
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 93 · 2025: 12
- FWCI
- 116.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- AI & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- AI companions, social robots, human-robot relationships, loneliness, human-AI interaction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
